About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2
miranda rights? >> yes, that's my view. >> so that changes nothing in view of their ability to interrogate? >> what it changes is their ability to question him and use any statement that he makes. that they're not allowed to do. >> he is apparently claiming -- >> they don't need that in this case. they got a mountain of evidence against this guy. >> right. they have testified it seems against him and his brother for the act they perpetrated. >> correct. >> what they will i'm sure be extremely curious to find out if they can is are they part of a wider group of either like-minded individuals who have been coordinating themselves reading stuff on the internet, videos and so on, which apparently is what he's claiming. whether they're attached to anybody in chechnya, for example, or islamic fundamentalist nature, et cetera, et cetera, how far can you go in terms of eliciting that information from somebody like him in his position once he's had his miranda rights read to him as he now has? >> my view is you can go as far as you think it's productive to go. however, i don't think it's terribly p
a former federal prosecutor. we now that dzhokhar, suspect number two, has been read his miranda rights. sow won't be designated as an enemy combatant. but if he was labelled an enemy combatant, he wouldn't have been entitled to a lawyer and a jury trial. they could have asked him a lot of other questions without a lawyer present that may or may not be relevant to national security. now why did they make this decision not to go for enemy combatant status? do they think they have so much evidence in this case that they can go ahead with the civilian jury trial and they don't need to hide behind enemy combatant? >> i think that is certainly part of it. it does look like an overwhelming body of evidence. more than that, they thought they could get the immediate information they needed by the miranda exception, the public safety exception so they could make sure the public was safe. there accident seem to be an constitution aal basis to treat someone that commits a crime like this on our soil. the supreme court has upheld treating an american, the american taliban hamdi captured in afghanis
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)